Margaret (Daniela Denby- Ashby) first making friends with Nicholas (Brendan Coyle) and Bessy Higgins (Anna Maxwell Martin) (Sandy Welch’s 2004 North and South, Part 2)
yet men set me down in their fool’s books as a wise man, an independent character, strong-minded and all that cant — Mr Bell, North and South
Dear friends and readers,
This past spring I taught a course I called “Elizabeth Gaskell’s North and South in context.” Although I had spent over a year with a group of friends reading Gaskell’s short stories and a couple of novellas together on Women Writers through the Ages @ Yahoo, and had before read and responded intensely to Mary Barton, North and South and Wives and Daughters, I’d never really studied a Gaskell text the way I do when I teach it, and experience (as I do at the OLLIs at Mason and AU) true dialogue in a class room give-and-take. I listened to brilliant readings aloud on CD of Cranford, Mary Barton (Juliet Stevenson for Cover-to-cover), North and South itself (Clare Wille for Naxos) and Wives and Daughters. I wish there were a good one available for the Life of Charlotte Bronte. I could not find one. As with Fielding’s Tom Jones the fall before I also assigned some good essays which I’d never read before either, as we went along. I read Felicia Bonaparte’s half-mad biography too — the more I read Gaskell, the more I came to agree with her, to the point that I agreed Molly had in effect killed herself when she decided to follow Roger’s advice and accept and subdue herself to her new stepmother. The result of this immersion: I feel I got closer to Gaskell than I ever did before.
Paradoxically since North and South is a book that is doing so many different things and has a wide range of topics or subject matters, often but not always from the perspective of someone questioning authority, it’s the kind of book that you need a book to write about adequately. This blog is a series of notes towards such chapters.
To begin with, the book often takes unexpected turns. For example, it opens unexpectedly for a condition of England novel, partly based on the Preston cotton strike and the locks-out. Gaskell first creates lovingly the atmosphere of a sheltered home in an elegant London, where Margaret Hale, our heroine, her sleeping beauty rich cousin, Edith, and the shallow Aunt Shaw, and most of the women around them (it’s a household of women) seem ignorant of the hard realities of life — like the need to make or have access to money to support yourself. We are intent on beautiful shawls and clothes, a coming extravaganza of a wedding, and subtle controlling codes of manners.
When we move to Helstone which our heroine declared was idyllic, we find a pair of parents who hardly share an interest, the father a depressive, anxious, and seeking to throw off his job as a vicar and responsibilities because he has lost his belief in the Anglican system of thought and gov’t, a mother who is incompetent when it comes to anything practical and deeply dissatisfied with her life as affording her no companionship with people like herself; the neighbors around them are desperately poor. When Mr Hale allows his crisis of conscience to become public and insists on moving to the North to an uncertain precarious future as a tutor, what Gaskell emphasizes is how he need not explain himself. What he says goes, no matter how weak a man he is. They repine, but they obey.
Bessy in the factory when first seen (North and South, Part 2)
In Milton (Manchester), we meet a strange (unexpected) secondary heroine, a dream-figure alter-ego for Margaret, Bessy Higgins, a desperately poor factory worker, dying of a lung disease, and learn the reason her father, Nicholas, Higgins put Betsy in the factory (where she contracted a fatal lung disease), did not leave her where she was in a household sewing was he worried she would be sexually harassed. The gender ideology and practices throughout limit all the women’s choices. The first thing our heroine did in the early phase of the book is refuse an offer of marriage from Henry Lennox, an intelligent sharp lawyer, sceptical, cold (who comes from that hard world and is clearly successful). She found the wedding otiose, but she finds her friendship with Bessy fulfilling. We see her and her mother’s life-long maid cope together over the course of the rest of the book. Dixon is not invisible; where she sleeps, what she thinks and feels shape the novel too. There’s a servant in Mrs Thornton’s household who affects the action, so too Thornton’s sister who marries a stock speculator whose offer of saving himself from bankruptcy Thornton will refuse. The private worlds of women are also the public worlds of men. but we are not simply given a gendered female world as well as the class, industrial/agricultural, economic and religious worlds and conflicts; at each turn the plot-design is set up to thwart the usual expectations.
In each phase of this early part of the book room is left to dramatize experiences of life that don’t usually come up as important in the conventional plot-design. Gaskell here, and again later concentrates on what it’s like to move from one home or place to another, how traumatic this can be. The family will have to live on a small income and find aplace to live they can be comfortable in and afford. Margaret has bad dreams the night before they go off to Milton: these are partly sexual in nature and show that she refused Henry Lennox out of an inability to face her sensuality and sexuality. Late in the book when so many deaths have occurred as to make Margaret’s place and life in Milton no longer viable, she has a similar hard time moving back to London.
Thornton (Richard Armitage) arguing his side (North and South, Part 2)
Then the book is organized as a series of conversations or debates on ideas that control the character’s behavior and the options their society allows everyone. There is no climax but ideas are debated and we are left to think for ourselves, comparing the ideas the characters have to the dramatic scenes in which the debate occurs and placed nearby. One is about the responsibilities of owners to workmen: these are dialogues about power, about recognizing obligation, about how people regard one another when they are part of groups in conflict. When the book’s romance hero, Mr Thornton, stands up for rigid “political economy” (laissez-faire ideas) and denies he has anything to do with the time allowed his workers when they are not working for him, we see that he is not admitting to his power, but neither he or Margaret, or the workman, Nicholas Higgins, who presents the chartist and burgeoning socialistic point of view of the union, take into account Bessy who we meet in the next chapter. Beyond how ill she is, why she became ill, how she spends her life, there are her religious mystical visions from the Bible which give her what comfort she has. These so irritate Higgins as they are presented as making lived life unimportant, that he produces an atheistic vision of the world, one pessimistic, cynical, grim: how could any good God or rational consciousness have produced this world? The book may be read as a series of tableaux, debates, dialogues, dramatic scenes – or dream thoughts as in the presentation of Bessy, a kind of deep or hidden self for impulses and feelings in Gaskell herself in debate with the scepticism and disillusion of her father, Nicholas.
Matty (Judi Dench) and Mary Smith (Lisa Dillon) read Matty’s brother, Peter’s letters together (Heidi Thomas’s 2007 Cranford Chronicles)
It also drives towards primal scenes that repeat across Gaskell’s oeuvre. For example, the way the theme of injustice in the military, specifically naval world, is brought forward is through primal memeory dream scenes. First, letter-reading — just as in Gaskell’s Cranford where Gaskell’s Matty and her niece, Mary, are enacting Gaskell’s own loss of her brother when he went to sea as a young man. He was the only member of her nuclear family who remained loyal and alive and wrote her letters from far away, encouraging her, a deeply congenial spirit; when he died at sea, the loss was profound. In North and South, Margaret and her mother go over Frederick’s sea-stained letters to introduce why Frederick cannot come home to England ever again. There is another letter scene in he film where Margaret is remembering when they first got news of the mutiny: through her memory’s eye (flashback), we see Mrs Hale frantically tear up the newspaper.
Margaret’s father who himself felt he must buck church authority and lost his position now has to persuade Margaret that Frederick cannot go to court to explain why the men aboard ship mutinied and he deserted (a cruel captain who needled and risked his men’s lives, causing one of them to nearly become crippled, flogged mercilessly for minor infractions): the authorities will support their tyrannical control by never admitting to any wrong. There is no debate here, only another primal scene where Margaret is standing on a train station, attempting to help Frederick flee to London, and they are accosted by an angry embittered man who thinks to turn Frederick in for a ransom. Frederick sees him as insulting Margaret and as drunk, hits him back and the man falls down the steps, hurting himself sufficiently so that he dies soon after. Meanwhile Frederick vanishes into the dark night of the train. The scene at the train station is deep with longing – Gaskell’s dream thoughts well up. No film adaptation of North and South could leave out Frederick, the train scene.
Margaret’s terror as she realizes she and Frederick are seen and are about to be accosted (North and South, Part 3)
For the rest of the novel Gaskell has Margaret brood over this scene ostensibly because she tells a lie to a police magistrate that she was not there and knows nothing about this man to protect Frederick (“strange, wild, miserable feelings”). She is suspected of a sexually clandestine relationship with a strange man by a possessive Thornton who has asked her to marry him — she refused him too. She is deeply attracted to Thornton and intensely regrets that she seems to have lost his respect. Hated by Mrs Thornton, the mother, for having rejected her son at the same time as Mrs Thornton is bitterly possessively jealousy, Mrs Thornton takes the opportunity of supposedly warning her to frame Margaret to her face as possibly unchaste. What an extraordinary way to present the idea give people power and they abuse it – it’s understood how desertion is bad, and discipline needs to be maintained but it should not be disproportionate, not torture (which flogging was). And how vulnerable Frederick is to someone who wants a bribe. We see how vulnerable women are to perpetual sexual suspicion.
Osborne Hamley’s death, Squire Hamley (Michael Gambon) and Molly (Justine Waddell) (Andrew Davies’s 1999 Wives and Daughters, Part 4 of 75 minute episodes)
Everyone who reads Gaskell knows that many of her character die. She once joked the best title for her book (North and South was Dickens’s choice) would be Variations on Death. The characters learn about life through their encounters with death. All the deaths are linked to depression too. Margaret’s mother dies of cancer — brought on by stress; Bessy of her illness and wild dreams; Mr Hale of grief after his wife’s death and a sense that he has lost all occupation and meaning when he begins to lose his pupils; Mr Hale’s mentor, friend, and a third man attracted to Margaret (who Gaskell meant to make an older suitor), Mr Bell of an inexplicable but real depression. Early in the novel we are told Mr Thornton’s father killed himself when he became a bankrupt failure from gambling and alcohol. Shortly after the strike is over, one of the workers, Mr Boucher, kills himself, driven by his wife’s grief over her children’s “clemming” during the strike, and his own despair. Gaskell’s belief that death brings people together, makes their individual humanity plain to one another is shown over and over. I tried to get at some of this material by explicating a few of Gaskell’s epigraphs.
Gaskell quotes from the 4th chapter of Job. “Man that is born of women is of few days and full of trouble.” First half insists that all nature renews itself, but the individual person does not come back. “A tree may sprout again, a flower. Question is where does his “ghost” go? Job wishes to hide himself, everything washes away, ends on how man grieves and mourns. No answer given. She quotes Wordsworth. People tend to remember these things how they want to. Traditional one would be from Edmund Spenser’s Faerie Queene (Book 5)
What though the sea with waves continuall
Does eate the earth, it is nor more at all:
Nor is the earth the lesse, or loseth ought,
For whatsoever from one place doth fall,
Is with the tide unto an other brought:
For there is nothing lost, that may be found, if sought.
Margaret in mourning (North and South, Part 4)
But Gaskell’s references are to sceptical works. At one point she alludes to Byron’s poem called The Island; or Christian and his comrades. It’s a satire on Pilgrim’s progress and Robinson Crusoe rolled into one. I read aloud the whole of the epigraph for the chapter (33) from the poem by Henry King is one of the most moving poems in the English language I know of where a spouse mourns the death of another. Exequy is a funeral rite or ceremony. There’s a stanza where he says he will soon overtake her and that’s what he lives for
Stay for me there, I will not fail
To meet thee in that hollow vale.
And think not much of my delay;
I am already on the way,
And follow thee with all the speed
Desire can make, or sorrows breed.
Each minute is a short degree,
And every hour a step towards thee.
At night when I betake to rest,
Next morn I rise nearer my west …
I loved the ending of the book. Yes Gaskell was forced to cut and probably would have given us far more of a courtship for Thornton and Margaret. But look at what she didn’t cut, what she took out time to dramatize. There are the debates between Mr Thornton and Mr Bell, with Mr Thornton emerging sympathetically as the person openly taking life seriously. The second is the development of a relationship of respect and friendship (for what else is it) between Thornton and Higgins, however improbable. Gaskell shows how comforting Margaret finds it to be alone, not to have to answer to anyone, she finds herself growing firmer and she can tell herself if only Thornton weren’t so cold and they could be friends, she could live with his not knowing – what she can’t see is he feels he must be cold or he will allow his feelings for her to surface and he’s had enough too. She reads Francois de St Sale, the passage is French is from one of these religious meditative books people, especially women read before their were novels. Disguised as religious exhortations, they are often about coping with depression and seek to help someone all alone, no one to talk to, they had no language with with to discuss depression without blaming someone as having done wrong. She sits on the beach at Cromer looking out at the sea and thinks again. When she returns to London, she refuses to give up all her time to the rituals of shallow social life, and instead becomes a female visitor Gaskell writes: “she had learnt, in those solemn hours of thought, that she herself must one day answer for her own life, and what she had done with it and she tried to settle that difficult problem for women, how much was to be utterly merged in obedience to authority, and how much might be set apart for freedom in working.” I daresay for the modern reader the first idea (utterly merged) will get a strong “none,” and the second seem to lack enough sense of pleasure. In one of her letters on the ending of the novel in swift romance, Gaskell suggests that the relationship could easily “go smash,” and has the last words of the novel Margaret’s remembering she will have to deal with Mr Thornton’s mother.
A dream-like moment of Margaret in Helstone (North and South, Part 4)
Lest we read the book too hopefully there is more primal matter: Gaskell also brings us back to Helstone (to show how it’s again changed), also a re-enactment of her childhood brought up in county by her single aunt Lumb and disabled cousin. Gaskell takes out time to tell the story of how Margaret discovers that the neighbor of one woman she visits boiled a living cat until it died in an agon of pain while drowning. Why: the neighbor was afraid her husband would be angry as she gave his clothes to a fortune teller. The story is even worse in this sense: the woman telling it is not indignant and horrified for the cat, no she’s just bothered that it was her cat. Gaskell sees the horror that people are too – what they are capable of. She puts it down to ‘a want of imagination … and therefore of any sympathy with the suffering animal.” When one attributes the vast evils people do or tolerate to a failure of the imagination it seems so mild a thing to say, but this failure is central.
I hope this series of notes on the novel has conveyed something of its nature (the kinds of texts it offers), the sources of its power and content too. I strongly recommend watching Sandy Welch’s film too. North and South is, as are all Gaskell’s texts, deep l’ecriture-femme, whose forms, motivations, and greatness are not well understood. Feminist criticism talks generally about this faultline in books, but hesitates before specific examples. I’ve presented a specific 19th century example which passes muster in the male worlds of publishing and respectable books as a condition of England novel about a series of outwardly objective themes.
Ellen
Thank you for this. I read quickly from beginning to end and was, in a way, exhilarated by your willingness to show this novel (which I read and enjoyed decades ago) both in its own terms and as available to us today. I don’t think any particular thing you wrote was new to me but the ensemble was certainly new and persuasive.
I write as not only as a Victorian but as a long-time feminist
Michael Wolff
Thank you so much. I am so grateful that you like it and it refreshes you on the novel. Since we chatted on another list, I’ve become a firm lover of all of Middlemarch and Daniel Deronda. My younger has grown up, and listened to all of DD while she was in the car with me (read aloud) and she loves the Jewish plot best, Mirah being her favorite character.
If you trace allusions within the text: Some of Margaret’s remarks are straight from Carlyle: a Tory but a radical Tory critiquing the new relationship between people as sheerly cash nexus. One book Mr Thornton has been reading is Cromwells 8 volumes of letters as edited by Carlyle. Obviously Gaskell has read it. It’s a defense of himself, which is seen as despotism in the book — so the allusion links Thornton to a defense of despotism.
To give you a feel for Carlyle’s notes from the book:
This action of the English Regicides [the execution of Charles I, accompanied by the death warrant, signed first by John Bradshaw, then Thomas Grey, then Oliver Cromwell,and then 56 more] did in effect strike a damp like death through the heart of Flunkyism universally in this world. Whereof Flunkyism, Cant, Cloth-worship, or whatever ugly name it have, has gone about incurably
sick ever since; and is now at length, in these generations, very rapidly dying…
——–Thomas Carlyle, _Oliver Cromwell’s
Letters and Speeches_, Vol II, p 94
Flunkism is patronage, and its mean false worship of false norms and power. All the repetitions of the word “cant” made me remember Trollope’s satire of Carlyle as Sir Pessmist Anticant.
In this reading scheme are supposed to see Hale as fatuous – his weak kind of can’t we all like one another, and references to Plato are irrelevant, unreal. Gaskell’s father wrote a treatise”: Remarks on the very inferior utility of classical learning.
MIke Powe: “I was most struck by the fact that her novels all center around lying. Someone tells a lie and all the drama builds up around the impact of that fib. Often, it’s a “white lie,” like Ruth making up a false past for herself. And, that reminded me of the famous Biblical scene in which Peter denies knowing Jesus — thus fulfilling Jesus’ prediction — because of his fear of being punished. Gaskell’s treatment of these self-created social maelstroms is subtle and free of the moralizing that often afflicts 19th C novels dealing with moral questions.”
Me: I’ve not read Ruth, but lies are central to the devastations of Mary Barton, the misery of Wives and Daughters. Since I’m not religious my allusive web is secular; I agree Gaskell doesn’t moralize; instead the act is presented in this stark way, and we see characters suffer from it. Tillie Olson said “lies, secresy and silence” are central crushing motifs of women’s writing.
I asked for a copy of this book for Christmas one year, but my son and daughter in law couldn’t find it in the last minute rush. However, they gave me the DVD instead, which I duly watched and thought well done. I found it a very powerful story, and again found it both confusing and a little distressing to see how women were treated in those days – what they wanted in terms of a marriage partnership wasn’t necessarily acknowledged; a very patriarchal society. But the glimpse into industrial England was fascinating; the ‘north’ and ‘south’ contrasts were huge. The book was gifted to me for my next birthday, a welcome gift, and I’ve since read it twice..and one day will read it again. A very powerful book.
You might be interested to know this: Gaskell was forced by Dickens to make her book much shorter than she intended, and to cut whole chapters. Some versions of the novel repeat the original cuts: Chapters 45 and 46 (Not all a Dream and Once and Now). Some versions have a cut version of Chapter 44 (Ease Not Peace). She originally intended Mr Bell to ask Margaret to marry him and that is put back briefly in the film; she originally intended a longer London sequence, with perhaps a visit to the Exhibition of 1851. Welch dramatized that even though it’s not in the book. Dickens wanted her to write another driving book like Mary Barton; he couldn’t see the point of all the Margaret passages. He chose the title.
I thought all the additional changes Welch made perfect. Anna Maxwell Martin and Brendan Coyle are two of my favorite BBC actors so their presence in the film pleased me mightily.
I hope in the fall to teach Mary Barton. I knew Ioved Gaskell by the time of the year I read her online with a group of people. A theme not that important in North and South is that of disability: she is rare for not only having seriously realistic disabled characters but for treating them with respect: her concern, as a woman, is for the caretaker whose angle of vision she follows.
I did know about Dickens. At times he was not a fan of her work… I haven’t read Mary Barton as yet, but look forward to it. As in Dickens’ ‘Hard Times’, I found the cotton mills fascinating, as my grandparents worked in Lancashire cotton mills approximately twenty year after both the books were published. So it has a very personal appeal for me.
Barbara Morrison: “Fascinating post. I haven’t read much of Gaskell’s work but will now.”
Heartfelt thanks.
Dear Ellen – What a stunner of an essay! THANK-YOU so much for it. Meaty and pungent, it will take me back to Gaskell with new enthusiasm. I have always loved her, but it so GOOD to read such intelligent thinking and feeling about her. Splendid, thoughtful and rich.
THANK-YOU!
With love from London – Ruth R
Malvina, it seems to have been a matter of profit. The articles show he pressured her to do things to her work to make it more popular. These were not artistic decisions. She did break with him after a while — he’d never have stood Wives and Daughters. A good older book by John Sutherland called Victorian Novelists and Publishers demonstrates those novelists who were able to write masterpieces escaped from (or bowed to) the demands of the marketplace. So Lever, Ainsworth and Braddon either cannot or do not want truly create a great work out of themselves; they are pressured to write otherwise. Thackeray, Trollope, Gaskell manage to get out of the vise — not without a period of real difficulty. Dickens went into business on his own. He emerges as an astute businessman. It’s an enjoyable read.
It’s interesting to read what Dickens and Gaskell fought over. He wants her to write a more smashing ending for a ghost story or gussy up the ending of an instalment. He wants to her to cut something he fears controversial: he wants her to keep the ghost partly a projection (so the story is not so dark).
The personal appeal of Gaskell for me is her personality and moods as they emerge in the books, her politics, and her central writing of l’ecriture-femme. I love women’s books of a certain kind best. I find her letters great fun, her journalism interesting.
Thank you for your comments.
On l’ecriture-femme, I did not bring out in the blog (as we did in the class) the several parallels between the relationship of Thornton and Margaret across the book and Austen’s Darcy and Elizabeth. There are too many and one idiosyncratically close to deny the connection and influence: the antagonistic relationship hiding or part of deep sexual attraction, the slow movement towards opening up and falling in love, even the mother’s scene where she confronts Margaret functions similarly to Lady Catherine de Bourgh telling Elizabeth she’s not good enough.
In the 1979 and 1995 mini-series the proposal scene follows the book rather closely. The parallel is most clearly seen — and Sandy Welch’s production picks up on this so Armitage is pacing in front of the fireplace in ways that recall Colin Firth — in the proposal scene. In brief, Margaret accuses Thornton of not behaving like a gentleman: a gentleman would have no misunderstood at the strike; the scene is much sexier and Margaret is frightened by the vehemence of Thornton’s desire. Gaskell consciously had Austen in mind people debate: I think she did; we even have two proposals (well three if Mr Bell had made it into the novel). The comparison helps us understand or see the meanings of the scene. You do have to remember the previous text – that’s the way allusion works: the context of the previous work is in effect inserted into the new text and an amalgam of intertextuality makes the experience richer.
More at length, in Austen’s book when Elizabeth says to Darcy, sir had you behaved more like a gentleman, I would have received your proposal with more courtesy. Ouch. The two do not then debate what is the meaning of the word; they are in no doub that the concept itself is valuable. That is not the case here. Mr Thornton maintains such a concept is snobbery; and it’s one that degrades and debases unfairly those who lack manners and gives them an unfair advantage. Though Margaret does not admit it and slides over to the insult that so hurts – that he was throwing herself at him is how she thinks he feels – not quite, it’s a very complicated scene – he insist her sympathies are “misplaced,” and he as a master may be oppressed too, and that she has a helluva a sense of self for thinking she has been tainted by his interest. His love is real and true and not just lust.
She then asserts she is not afraid; no one has yet dared to be impertinent to her. Any thoughts?
In this case Thornton’s assertion he is a man, is the one we are shaped to identify with – later in the book again when Higgins comes to the house and debates with her father the meaning of religion, or when he says no one will now give him work and he wants to go down south, Margaret having given him a more positive view of the south than it merits, he comes in very ungentlemanly clothes and his manners and accent leave much to be desired by the Aunt Shaws of the world.
The scene’s use of the word man harks back to Robert Burns’s famous poem: A man’s a man for aye that.
In case you don’t know it:
Is there for honest Poverty
That hings his head, an’ a’ that;
The coward slave-we pass him by,
We dare be poor for a’ that!
For a’ that, an’ a’ that.
Our toils obscure an’ a’ that,
The rank is but the guinea’s stamp,
The Man’s the gowd for a’ that.
What though on hamely fare we dine,
Wear hoddin grey, an’ a that;
Gie fools their silks, and knaves their wine;
A Man’s a Man for a’ that:
For a’ that, and a’ that,
Their tinsel show, an’ a’ that;
The honest man, tho’ e’er sae poor,
Is king o’ men for a’ that. …
A prince can mak a belted knight,
A marquis, duke, an’ a’ that;
But an honest man’s abon his might,
Gude faith, he maunna fa’ that!
For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
Their dignities an’ a’ that;
The pith o’ sense, an’ pride o’ worth,
Are higher rank than a’ that.
Then let us pray that come it may,
(As come it will for a’ that,)
That Sense and Worth, o’er a’ the earth,
Shall bear the gree, an’ a’ that.
For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
It’s coming yet for a’ that,
That Man to Man, the world o’er,
Shall brothers be for a’ that.
It was a very well known and loved poem – by some, not by all. We have explored the epigraphs to the chapters. They all add meaning, some perhaps written by Gaskell herself.
Austen does not think to question the concept except ethically and as some kind of semi-universal at least English ideal. Gaskell does. The deep sexuality involved in Gaskell’s antagonists pair is either not there or not that conscious in Austen; it is I suggest strongly conscious in Gaskell but she is not dealing with it either. Maybe allowed by Dickens to develop her ending courtship more, she would have. She needed space and a different structure than forward thrust to climax (a male kind of structuring) to bring up or bring out this sexual material.
Pride and Prejudice, like Jane Eyre, is a key text for women’s writing …
I think you’re right, Ellen, that the book takes unexpected turns – it also slows down and sort of drags itself out a bit in the end but not in a bad but good way, which I really enjoyed. It isn’t too unsimilar to Woolson’s Anne in that way – the unexpected turns and slowing down at the end. I’ll have to watch the film when I get a chance.
This is a rich blog post, Ellen, and I hardly know where to begin. I suppose, before I forget, I will agree to the crucial importance of imagination–to our politics: the boiled cat is the emblem of so much.
As a serendipity, I was interested in the Byron poem “The Island,” as I have lately read Deleuze’s “Desert Island” with its scathing condemnation of Robinson Crusoe. Deleuze writes:
“One can hardly imagine a more boring novel, and it is sad to see children still reading it today. Robinson’s vision of the world resides exclusively in property; never have we seen an owner more ready to preach. The mythical recreation of the world from the deserted island gives way to the reconstitution of everyday bourgeois life from a reserve of capital.
Everything is taken from the ship. Nothing is invented. It is all painstakingly applied on the island. Time is nothing but the time necessary for capital to produce a benefit as the outcome of work. And the providential function of God is to guarantee a return. God knows his people, the hardworking honest type, by their beautiful properties, and the evil doers, by their poorly maintained, shabby property. Robinson’s companion is not Eve, but Friday, docile towards work, happy to be a slave, and too easily disgusted by cannibalism. Any healthy reader would dream of seeing him eat Robinson.”
Defoe, in his defense, has his positive side: perhaps in other places, such as his Captain Wentworth novel, written I believe right after Crusoe.
I was glad of the discussion of parallels to P&P.
It encourages me too as I contemplate re-assuming teaching in the summer and fall how teaching this novel led you to know it in a deeper, I would even say profound, way.
Finally, I wanted to say how much I loved the North and South mini-series and mourned its ending, and now I see it is rooted deeply in the novel itself. I read the novel in a graduate seminar at age 25 and it impressed me deeply, but I didn’t understand it then as one would when older.
Thank you equally for your thoughtful comments and stunningly refreshing take on Robinson Crusoe! It is boring; I never finished it. Deleuze is right: how do these Defoe scholars go on complacently about it? I’ve never read Foe; Jim did and as I recall thought it was not strong enough. William St Clair shows us how hard it was for anyone except a really large income to reach good and radical writing until at least the mid-19th century. That could be the reason for the popularity and spread of Crusoe. Defoe is easy reading. The establishment recognized the book was harmless, so they reprinted it endlessly. Along with Pilgrim’s Progress.
I admit I only skimmed the Byron, enough to know that like his Caine he was hitting hard just as Deleuze and you are doing at nonsense pieties which wouldn’t last very long if people would only see the life in front of them and think just a little.
I am using this teaching to get out of the house. I do get into contact with people and they are readers and it’s easier than with half-captive students: they are also mostly polite from years of life. But the joy and deeper impulse as I go on is to use the opportunity to go deep into a text. I wish I could see my way to dropping one but as long as I can each term have one a repeat of the previous term or something I’ve done already and the other new material, it’s workable for me.
I so wanted to explore Gaskell after we finished our year of reading Gaskell on Wwtta a few years ago now.
My cousin, Pat: “I ordered North and South the other night. (DVD, BBC series)”
Me: I predict you’ll be much moved — I didn’t emphasize how much it is about working people. It can be watched over and over. It has over-voice commentary for parts 1 & 4 too. So you can re-watch in slow motion and listen to the people talk about their decisions. If you don’t know it, I recommend Wives and Daughters too – I think you’d love that and it is also 4 hours with features.
Hi Ellen:
Iâm back and I really enjoyed your summary /analysis. As usual I think that your interpretation is excellent. And Iâm looking forward to the next class.
Best wishes,
Marilyn
Glad to hear from you. I trust you have a good and interesting time. I take it you’ll be in The Small House at Allington class? I was pushed to put the ceiling up to 35 so we’ll have a large class. I’m looking forward to it too. This coming week I’ll make the syllabus and put it on the blog as I’ve been doing. Ellen
[…] recent post by Ellen Moody about Gaskell’s novel North and South reminded me that I hadn’t read anything by […]
North and South , the 2004 version is my favorite. Margaret Hale & John Thornton are my favorite pair of lovers. I wish I had a love experience like that, but I guess I should treasure what I had, if not as picturisque. I have a lovely grandson now with hair color like Richard’s [not black, the original] and blue eyes, a really lovely boy who loves so well and loves to play ball. His laughter is contagious and has a lovely face with rounded cheeks. I am grateful for my blessings.